Saturday, August 14, 2010

Haecceities, strong essentiality of origins and science

(Premise) If essentiality of origins doesn't hold, then every particle has a haecceity.

(Premise) A haecceity of x is an intrinsic property of x.

(Premise) A haecceity of x isn't a physical property of x or a function of any physical properties of x.

(Premise) There is a particle each of whose intrinsic properties is a physical property or a function of physical properties.

Therefore, there is a particle that lacks a haecceity. (2-4)

Therefore, essentiality of origins holds. (1, 5)

Why believe (1)? Because if there are no haecceities then the only plausible account of transworld identity is that x in w1 is identical with y in w2 if and only if x and y have the same origins. And this forces essentiality of origins.
I think the problematic premise is (4). But it is still somewhat plausible.

2 comments:

Suppose every particle except one had a haecceity. One could then have an account of the identity of that particle without appealing to essentiality of origins, i.e., the particle is the one that lacks a haecceity. This weakens the considerations given in support of (1).

About Me

I am a philosopher at Baylor University. This blog, however, does not purport to express in any way the opinions of Baylor University. Amateur science and technology work should not be taken to be approved by Baylor University. Use all information at your own risk.